Not to keep bugging your mailboxes but I suppose the only real reasons
for keeping all those nvidia-specific-kernel packages in the AUR boils
down to these:
1) The user wants to install an Nvidia driver for a non-booted kernel,
yet he doesn't want to install the driver for any the other kernels
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:39 AM, Rémy Oudompheng
remyoudomph...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/3/31 Det nimetonma...@gmail.com:
Not to keep bugging your mailboxes but I suppose the only real reasons
for keeping all those nvidia-specific-kernel packages in the AUR boils
down to these:
1) The user wants
On 2011/3/31 Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.t...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with the concept. However, in your opinion does
nvidia-beta-all fall under non-reproducible? It does different things
on different machines, but entirely in a non-interactive way. In case
you don't want to bother to take a look at
Thanks for your response Rémy,
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:54 AM, Rémy Oudompheng
remyoudomph...@gmail.com wrote:
My definition was not about interactivity but dynamic nature.
nvidia-beta-all is dynamic in the sense that it *computes* local
variables that influence the resulting package. A
On 3/26/11, Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.t...@gmail.com wrote:
I can assure you that nvidia-beta-all (and nvidia-all which Det
maintains) builds the modules for all installed kernels.
I do? I didn't even know that. The Maintainer: None phrase was a
little confusing to me ^^.
Anyway, I posted an updated
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Det nimetonma...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/26/11, Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.t...@gmail.com wrote:
I can assure you that nvidia-beta-all (and nvidia-all which Det
maintains) builds the modules for all installed kernels.
I do? I didn't even know that. The Maintainer: None
On 3/19/11, Ike Devolder ike.devol...@gmail.com wrote:
For me its all the same, you can remove the nvidia-bede package
from aur
i'll keep it in my own source tree because the nvidia-all package
assumes the kernel version as the running version
most of the time i build for a kernen which is
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 9:15 PM, Det nimetonma...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/19/11, Ike Devolder ike.devol...@gmail.com wrote:
For me its all the same, you can remove the nvidia-bede package
from aur
i'll keep it in my own source tree because the nvidia-all package
assumes the kernel version as
On 26 March 2011 15:43, Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.t...@gmail.com wrote:
This is implicating a lot of packages.
Det
Hmm, didn't see the email from Devolder. Having written the initial
nvidia-beta-all package, I can assure you that nvidia-beta-all (and
nvidia-all which Det maintains) builds
On Saturday, March 19, 2011 20:19:41 Det wrote:
Hell,
So I've been thinking about this for some time now and I finally
decided to ask the ones who know the best: would it be enough to only
have 'nvidia-beta-all' and 'nvidia-all' in the AUR to replace all
those nvidia-ice, nvidia-bfs, eg.
Hell,
So I've been thinking about this for some time now and I finally
decided to ask the ones who know the best: would it be enough to only
have 'nvidia-beta-all' and 'nvidia-all' in the AUR to replace all
those nvidia-ice, nvidia-bfs, eg. packages? (Decluding nvidia-utils*,
of course.)
As
Op zaterdag 19 maart 2011 19:19:41 schreef Det:
Hell,
So I've been thinking about this for some time now and I finally
decided to ask the ones who know the best: would it be enough to only
have 'nvidia-beta-all' and 'nvidia-all' in the AUR to replace all
those nvidia-ice, nvidia-bfs,
12 matches
Mail list logo
